Systems for selecting a group of bidders for a current bidding event using prioritization

ABSTRACT

A method and system for selecting potential bidders or suppliers for a current electronic auction by using quantitative models to create a prioritized list of potential suppliers. A prioritization software analyzes a supplier&#39;s bidding participation history and bidding competitiveness history from the bidding data collected for all prior auctions in which the supplier participated or was requested by the auction coordinator to participate. Using the prior bid data, the software generates a participation score and a competitiveness score for the supplier. The participation and competitiveness scores may be combined to generate a combined score. All potential suppliers may be prioritized based on any of these scores individually or a combination of two or more of these scores. The prioritization list generated using quantitative values instead of subjective values minimizes the amount of unnecessary calls to potential suppliers and maximizes the likelihood that a called supplier will place a competitive bid in the current auction, thereby increasing the bidding yield per supplier selected.

This is a Continuation of application Ser. No. 11/582,932, filed Oct.17, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,401,035 which is a Divisional of U.S.application Ser. No. 10/052,064, filed Jan. 17, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No.7,146,331 which are hereby incorporated by reference.

BACKGROUND

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention generally relates to conducting online electronicauctions, and, more particularly, to a method and system for selectingpotential bidders or suppliers for an electronic auction by usingquantitative models to create a prioritized list of potential suppliers.

2. Description of Related Art

Procurement of goods and services have traditionally involved hightransaction costs. The cost of finding and qualifying potential biddershas been particularly high. The advent of electronic commerce hasintroduced new methods of procurement that lower some of the transactioncosts associated with procurement. Electronic procurement, in particularbusiness-to-business electronic procurement, matches buyers andsuppliers and facilitates transactions that take place on networkedprocessors.

Four models of electronic procurement have been developed: catalog,buyer-bidding auctions, seller-bidding auctions, and exchangemarketplaces.

The “catalog” model was an early form of online electronic procurement.Initially, electronic catalogs were developed primarily by sellers,typically suppliers, to help customers obtain information aboutproducts, and order supplies electronically. Those first electroniccatalogs were single-source; i.e. they only allowed customers to obtaininformation and products from a specific supplier.

Although the first electronic catalogs reduced the information searchcost associated with procurement, customers were disadvantageously“locked in” to one supplier at each electronic catalog. Customers werethus unable to compare a number of competing products in a singlecatalog. Therefore, certain suppliers with single-source catalogs beganincluding competitors' products in their systems. The inclusion ofcompeting products in electronic catalogs reduced procurementinformation search costs even further. By offering competing products,electronic catalogs became “electronic markets.”

Many electronic catalogs, however, were biased toward the supplieroffering the electronic catalog, and it was thought that procurementcosts could be lowered further through an unbiased market. Therefore,third-party “market makers” have developed markets for many standardproducts and services, which were intended to be unbiased markets. Forexample, Inventory Locator Services has compiled a database that listsall airplane parts suppliers that have a certain item in stock. Buyersdial into the database to get information on the parts they need. Here,it is a third party, Inventory Locator Service, not a supplier, that iscreating the unbiased electronic market.

Electronic commerce using the electronic catalog model typicallyinvolves one buyer and one seller at a time. When many buyers competefor the right to buy from one seller, a buyer-bidding auction model, orforward auction, is created. Catalog and buyer-bidding auction models,however, have limitations and do not work well in every situation. Forexample, it is difficult for a supplier to publish set prices in acatalog for custom products. Therefore, when a buyer requires a customproduct, pricing for that product typically will not be found in acatalog. Likewise, it is difficult to specify a custom product andidentify buyers who might use that custom product for a buyer-biddingauction. Additionally, there may be only one buyer interested in acustom product, such that a buyer-bidding auction may not be applicablein all cases. Thus, few suppliers can typically provide custom goods andservices and standard product and pricing information is typically notavailable for buyers of custom industrial products.

Referring again to the cost of traditional procurement, and particularlyprocurement of custom products and services, when a company requires acustom product, a buyer/purchaser for the company would typicallyprocure the product by searching for potential suppliers and thenacquiring price quotes from the potential suppliers for the neededcustom product. The search tends to be slow and random, and typicallyrelies heavily on personal relationships. The costs associated withlocating vendors, comparing prices, and negotiating a deal are thereforelarge.

As a solution to reduce the cost associated with procurement of customproducts and services, supplier-bidding auctions for products andservices defined by a buyer have been developed. The assignee of thepresent application has developed a system in which sellers downwardlybid against one another to achieve the lowest market price in asupplier-bidding auction. The auction marketplace is one-sided, i.e.,one buyer and many potential suppliers or sellers, althoughmultiple-buyer auctions are possible. Typically, the products beingpurchased are components or materials; however, services may also bepurchased through auction. “Components” may typically include fabricatedtangible pieces or parts that become part of assemblies of durableproducts. Example components include gears, bearings, appliance shelves,door handles, etc. “Materials” may typically include bulk quantities ofraw materials that are further transformed into products. Examplematerials include corn syrup or sheet metal.

Even in a supplier-bidding auction, the search for potential suppliersmay still remain slow and random and the possibility of obtaining pricequotes from the potential suppliers with some degree of certaintyremains illusive because of the subjective nature of supplier selection.The subjective evaluation factors may include, for example, the buyer'spersonal impression about the potential supplier, the frequency of priorauction participation by that supplier, etc. Because of such subjectiveevaluation, many potentially promising suppliers may get overlooked andnot contacted by the buyer. It is therefore desirable to reduce thetransaction cost involved in supplier selection by devising a schemewherein potential suppliers are selected objectively and the number ofsuppliers required at the beginning of a competitive bidding event isdramatically reduced. In other words, it is desirable that suppliers whodo not appear objectively promising for a bidding event may not getinvited to participate in the auction. It is further desirable tominimize the amount of unnecessary calls to potential suppliers and tomaximize the likelihood that a called supplier will place a competitivebid, thereby increasing the bidding yield per supplier selected.

SUMMARY

In one embodiment, the present invention contemplates a method forselecting a group of potential bidders or suppliers for a currentbidding event to auction a lot having one or more items. The methodfirst identifies a prior bidding event where one or more itemssubstantially similar to at least one of the items in the lot wereauctioned. The prior bidding event may include a number of contactevents (e.g., a “bid-in” event, a “sent RFQ (Request for Quote)” event,a “Fact Sheet” event, etc.) for each bidder participating in that priorbidding event. The method further identifies one or more participatingbidders for that prior bidding event and quantifies participation ofeach identified bidder in each of the plurality of contact events forthe prior bidding event, thereby generating a correspondingparticipation score for each identified bidder. All identified biddersare then prioritized in a first descending order based on theirrespective participation scores, thereby generating a first prioritizedlist of bidders. The method then selects the group of potential biddersfor the current bidding event from the first prioritized list ofbidders.

In another embodiment, the present invention further contemplates amethod for selecting a group of potential suppliers which identifieseach bid-in event for the prior bidding event and obtains acorresponding rank for each identified bidder for each bid-in event inwhich that identified bidder has participated. The method thenquantifies each corresponding rank for each identified bidder for eachbid-in event in which that identified bidder has participated, therebygenerating a corresponding competitiveness score for each identifiedbidder. All identified bidders are then prioritized in a seconddescending order based on their respective competitiveness scores,thereby generating a second prioritized list of bidders. The method mayselect the group of potential bidders for the current bidding event fromthe second prioritized list of bidders.

In a still further embodiment, the present invention contemplates amethod for selecting a group of potential suppliers which generates acorresponding combined score for each identified bidder using thatbidder's participation and competitiveness scores. The method thenprioritizes all identified bidders in a third descending order based ontheir respective combined scores, thereby generating a third prioritizedlist of bidders. The method may select the group of potential biddersfor the current bidding event from the third prioritized list ofbidders.

The supplier prioritization may be accomplished using prioritizationsoftware according to the present invention. The software analyzes asupplier's bidding participation history and bidding competitivenesshistory using the prior bid data and generates a participation score anda competitiveness score for the supplier. The participation andcompetitiveness scores may be combined to generate a combined score. Thesoftware may generate one or more prioritized lists that may contain thenames of suppliers in a descending order so that the auction coordinatormay select which of the listed suppliers be requested to participate inthe current auction.

The supplier prioritization software according to the present inventiondramatically reduces the number of suppliers required at the beginningof a competitive bidding event or auction. Thus, the prioritizationsoftware assists in reducing the transaction cost involved in supplierselection by generating, using objective data, a prioritized list ofpotential suppliers that may be invited to participate in the auction.The prioritization list generated using quantitative values (instead ofsubjective values) further minimizes the amount of unnecessary calls topotential suppliers and maximizes the likelihood that a called supplierwill place a competitive bid, thereby increasing the bidding yield persupplier selected.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are included to provide a furtherunderstanding of the invention and are incorporated in and constitute apart of this specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention thattogether with the description serve to explain the principles of theinvention. In the drawings:

FIG. 1A is a schematic illustration of the entities involved in anembodiment of an auction wherein the sponsor identifies goods orservices to be purchased in a request for quotation;

FIG. 1B is a schematic illustration of entities participating in anembodiment of an auction;

FIG. 1C is a schematic illustration of entities participating in anembodiment of a contract award following an auction;

FIG. 2 is a schematic illustration of communications links between thecoordinator, the buyer, and the suppliers in an embodiment of anauction;

FIG. 3 illustrates various software modules and auction-related data inconjunction with an exemplary auction coordinator computer system;

FIG. 4 shows various functions performed by the prioritization moduleaccording to one embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary user interface generated and displayedby the prioritization module according to one embodiment of the presentinvention;

FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary scoring scheme utilized by theprioritization module in one embodiment of the present invention togenerate a participation score for a bidder;

FIG. 7 illustrates an exemplary scoring scheme utilized by theprioritization module in one embodiment of the present invention togenerate a competitiveness score for a bidder; and

FIG. 8 illustrates an exemplary scatter diagram depicting an X-Y plot ofprioritization and competitiveness scores for a number of suppliers.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Reference will now be made in detail to the preferred embodiments of thepresent invention, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanyingdrawings. It is to be understood that the figures and descriptions ofthe present invention included herein illustrate and describe elementsthat are of particular relevance to the present invention, whileeliminating, for purposes of clarity, other elements found in typicalauction systems and computer networks.

In a supplier-bidding auction or reverse auction, bids, which are oftenin the form of a price quote, typically start high and move downwardover time as bidders interact to establish a closing price. It is notedthat the terms “supplier” and “bidder” are used interchangeably hereinto refer to a person or legal entity participating as a bidder in, forexample, an on-line auction. Similarly, the terms “sponsor”, “buyer”,“purchaser” or “auction requester” are also used interchangeably hereinto refer to a person or legal entity that puts up a lot (as definedhereinbelow) for auction and requests bids for the same from thesuppliers or bidders. It is further noted that the terms “products,”“goods,” “materials,” and “services” are used to refer to (based on thecontext of the discussion) the items to be auctioned.

The basic process for a purchaser sponsored supplier-bidding or reverseauction, as conducted by the assignee of the present invention, isdescribed below with reference to FIGS. 1A-1C, which illustrate thefunctional elements and entities involved in setting up and conducting atypical supplier-bidding auction. FIG. 1A illustrates the creation of anauctioning event or a competitive bidding event (CBE), FIG. 1Billustrates the bidding during an auction, and FIG. 1C illustratesresults after completion of a successful auction. It is noted that FIGS.1A-1C are for illustrative purpose only. In other words, even thoughonly three bidders 12, 14, and 16 are shown in the auction processdepicted in FIGS. 1A-1C, it is obvious that in an actual auction theremay be more or less than three bidders participating in the auctiondepending on, for example, the products or services to be auctioned, thequalifications demanded of a bidder, how commercially lucrative theauction is, the reputation of the sponsor 10, etc.

Industrial buyers do not typically purchase one component at a time.Rather, they tend to purchase whole families of similar components.Therefore, in a typical industrial supplier-bidding auction, productsare grouped together in “lots” of related items for bidding. In aregular lot bidding auction, each lot is composed of one or more “lineitems.” In the regular lot bidding auction, the suppliers bid on eachline item and the bidder having the best bid for all of the parts in thelot is the best bidder. The best bidder (e.g., the bidder 14 in FIG. 1C)is typically awarded a contract to supply the items in the lot. Bylotting products, potential suppliers can bid on lots for which they arebest suited, and are not typically required to bid on every lot. Such adivision into lots beneficially reduces the barrier to entry for newpotential suppliers that only have capability to supply some of theneeded products (or services) in the auction. Reducing the barrier toentry also benefits the purchaser by injecting additional bidders intobidding for certain lots.

Typically, components in a lot are related to one another such that itis more efficient to have a supplier provide all of the components inthat lot. As an example, a buyer might purchase a given plastic knob intwo different colors, or might purchase a nameplate in four differentlanguages. Those parts are so similar that it is nearly always moreefficient to purchase those related components from the same supplierbecause, for example, all of the knobs may be made using the same mold.Thus, such related items are typically grouped in a single “lot.” As isknown by one skilled in the art, there are many additional methods oflotting products for an auction.

As will be apparent to one skilled in the art, while the invention isgenerally described in terms of one buyer and multiple suppliers, thepresent invention may also be used in other types of electronic markets,such as auctions having multiple potential buyers and sellers, forwardauctions having a single seller and multiple potential purchasers,upward-bidding auctions, or electronic exchange marketplaces. As notedhereinbefore, the term “sponsor” is utilized herein to identify theparty or parties that originate the auction. In a forward auction, forexample, the sponsor would typically be the supplier or seller of one ormore goods or services. In such a forward auction, that sponsor mightstate a good that it desires to sell and receive bids from partieswishing to purchase that good. Those parties wishing to purchase thatgood would therefore be “bidders” 12-16 in such a forward auction.

In a reverse auction example, the sponsor would typically be thepurchaser or buyer of one or more goods or services. In such a reverseauction, that supplier might state a good that it desires to purchaseand receive bids from parties wishing to supply that good. Those partieswishing to supply that good would furthermore be “bidders” 12-16 in sucha reverse auction.

In the typical supplier-bidding reverse auction model, the product orservice to be purchased is usually defined by the sponsor of theauction. As shown in the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 1A, when thesponsor 10 decides to use the auctioning system of the present inventionto procure products or services, the sponsor 10 provides information toan auction coordinator 20. That information may include informationabout incumbent suppliers and historic prices paid for the products orservices to be auctioned, for example. Typically, the sponsor 10 mayalso work with the auction coordinator 20 to define the products andservices to be purchased in the auction and, if desired, lot theproducts and services appropriately so that needed products and servicescan be procured using optimal auction dynamics. A specification may thenbe prepared for each desired product or service, and a Request forQuotation (“RFQ”) generated for the auction.

Next, the auction coordinator 20 typically identifies potentialsuppliers 12-16 (as discussed in more detail hereinbelow), preferablywith input from the sponsor 10, and invites the potential suppliers orbidders 12-16 to participate in the upcoming auction. The suppliers12-16 that are selected to participate in the auction may be givenaccess to the RFQ, typically through an RFQ in a tangible form, such ason paper or in an electronic format.

As shown in FIG. 1B, during a typical auction, bids are made for lots.Bidders 12-16 may submit actual unit prices for each line item within alot. However, the competition in an auction is typically based on theaggregate or total value bid for all line items within a lot. Theaggregate value bid for a lot may, therefore, depend on the level andmix of line item bids and the quantity of goods or services that areoffered for each line item. Thus, bidders submitting bids at the lineitem level may actually be competing on the lot level. During theauction, the sponsor 10 can typically monitor the bidding as it occurs.Bidders 12-16 may also be given market feedback during the auction sothat they may bid competitively.

Feedback about bidding activity is referred to as “market feedback” andincludes any information or data related to the bidders 12-16 or theirbids, interrelationships between those bids, and any other bid relatedinformation or data that is received before or during the auction.Market feedback may include, for example, bids that have been placed byother bidders 12-16, the rank of a bidder in relation to one or moreother bidders 12-16, the identity of bidders 12-16, or any subset ofthat information. Market feedback may also include non-pricinginformation such as, for example, the quality of the goods to beprovided by bidders 12-16 and shipping costs associated with one or morebidders 12-16. Providing such market feedback to bidders 12-16 in anauction helps create real-time competitive interaction amongparticipants in the auction because, without feedback, bidders 12-16 whoare not leading in an auction might not be aware of their relativeposition and would have less incentive to revise their price quotes andplace additional bids to remain competitive.

After the auction, the auction coordinator 20 may analyze the auctionresults with the sponsor 10. The sponsor 10 typically conducts finalqualification of the low bidding supplier or suppliers. The sponsor 10may furthermore retain the right not to award business to a low biddingsupplier (e.g., the supplier 14 in FIG. 1C) based on final qualificationor other business concerns. As shown in FIG. 1C, at least one supplycontract is usually drawn up and executed based on the results of theauction.

The auction may be conducted electronically between bidders 12-16 attheir respective remote sites and the auction coordinator 20 at itssite. In an alternative embodiment, instead of the auction coordinator20 managing the auction from its site, the sponsor 10 may itself performthe auction coordinator tasks from the sponsor's site.

Information may be conveyed between the coordinator 20 and the bidders12-16 via any known communications medium. As shown in FIG. 2, bidders12-16 may participate in the auction through the Internet via a networkservice provider 40 accessed, for example, through a dial-up telephoneconnection. Alternately, sponsors 10 and bidders 12-16 may be coupled tothe auction by communicating directly with the coordinator 20 through apublic switched telephone network, a wireless network (including, forexample, a cellular telephone network), or any other known connectionmethod. Other methods of connecting sponsors 10 and bidders 12-16 andother communications media are known to those skilled in the art, andare intended to be included within the scope of the present invention.For example, the sponsor computer terminal 10 may be connected to theauction coordinator's computer terminal 20 via a LAN (local areanetwork), WAN (wide area network) or any other suitable datacommunication network.

It is noted that the same reference numeral is used herein to refer to aperson or entity and its computer terminal for ease of discussion. Forexample, the reference numeral “20” is used in FIG. 2 to refer to theauction coordinator and also to refer to the computer terminalaccessible to or operated by the same auction coordinator, depending onthe context of reference. Similarly, the reference numeral “12” refersto the bidder-1 in FIG. 2 and also to the computer terminal accessibleto or operated by bidder-1. Furthermore, it is noted that although onecomputer terminal 20 is illustrated at the auction coordinator's site,there may be more than one computer terminal located at that site andlinked to one another via, for example, an ethernet LAN. Each computerat the auction coordinator's site may be configured to store a specifictype of information (e.g., the supplier bidding history, the suppliercapability profile information, etc., discussed hereinbelow withreference to FIG. 3) related to the auction event.

A computer software application (“the auction communication software”)may be used to manage the auction. The auction communication softwaremay include two components: a client component and a server component.Each client component may reside on a bidder's computer terminal 12-16and the server component may reside on the “host” computer terminal 20.The client and server components may facilitate data communicationbetween bidders' computers 12, 14, 16 and the host computer 20. Thecommunication between a client component and the server componentachieves auction-related transaction processing including, for example,customer-validation (e.g., user-ID and passwords), receipt of bidderprofile, bid data collection, delivery of notifications and informationabout winning bids, etc. Each bidder computer terminal 12-16 and theauction host computer 20 may be capable of processing various data andgenerating appropriate information displays for the human operators atrespective computer terminals. As noted hereinbefore, the sponsor 10 mayitself act as the auction coordinator 20. In that event, the sponsor'scomputer terminal 10 may function as the host computer 20 and includethe necessary hardware and software.

In one embodiment, during the auction process, various auction-relateddata (discussed hereinbelow with reference to FIG. 3) may get collectedand stored—either at the computer 20 or at one or more other computers(not shown) at the auction coordinator's site. The auction coordinatormay store such auction-related data as, for example, information about asupplier's capability to participate in the current auction, informationabout a supplier's past performance in various prior auctions, etc. Asupplier prioritization software module (discussed later with referenceto FIG. 3) operates on such auction-related data to generate supplierprioritization information for the current auction as discussedhereinbelow with reference to FIGS. 3-8.

It is to be understood, however, that the present invention may be usedin other applications, that the present invention would not necessarilyhave to be carried out online, and that the present invention may beperformed by other than a computer processor. The present invention mayalso be utilized in connection with auctions other than reverseauctions. For example, the present invention may be advantageouslyutilized with forward auctions, wherein the party offering the highestpriced qualified bid, rather than the lowest priced qualified bid (as,for example, in a reverse auction), is awarded the goods or servicesbeing sold. Thus, placing a “better bid” in a reverse auction indicatesplacing a lower bid, while placing a “better bid” in a forward auctionindicates placing a higher bid.

FIG. 3 illustrates various software modules and auction-related data inconjunction with an exemplary auction coordinator computer system 20.The auction coordinator's computer 20 may include an operating system23, the supplier prioritization module 24 (discussed in detailhereinbelow), the server component of the auction communication software25, and the server module of the TCP/IP (Transmission ControlProtocol/Internet Protocol) software 26. In one embodiment, the auctioncoordinator's computer terminal 20 is an IBM-PC type computer systemoperating under the Microsoft Windows® NT operating system environment.Similarly, each bidder's computer terminal 12-16 is also an IBM-PC lineof computer system with Windows® 2000 operating system. The Internetprotocol software (to carry out the auction over the Internet) for theauction coordinator's computer terminal and for each bidder's computerterminal may include respective server and client versions of theMicrosoft Internet Explorer web browser software. Other web browsers,operating systems, or computer architectures may be convenientlyemployed as well.

The host computer system 20 may further include a processor or centralprocessing unit (CPU) 21, a random access memory (RAM) unit 22 and adata storage unit 27 to facilitate execution of various software modulesshown in FIG. 3. Additionally, the host computer 20 also includes inputand output devices 29 (such as, for example, a monitor, a printer, amouse and a keyboard) and a communications interface 28 (including, forexample, a modem unit (not shown)) for communicating with the biddercomputers 12-16 and also for communicating with other computers at theauction coordinator's site. The data storage device may include, eitherindividually or in combination, for example, a magnetic storage device,a random access memory device (RAM), or a read only memory device (ROM).As noted hereinbefore, the sponsor 10 may itself act as the auctioncoordinator 20. In that event, the sponsor's computer terminal 10 mayfunction as the host computer 20 and include the hardware and softwaredescribed hereinabove for the host computer 20.

It is noted that although the prioritization module 24 is shown toreside on the host computer 20, in one embodiment, the prioritizationmodule 24 may be installed on a stand-alone computer (i.e., a computernot connected to any other computer system or network) and variousauction-related data 32, 34, 36 (described later hereinbelow) may besupplied to the module 24 to generate the supplier prioritizationinformation in a manner described hereinbelow.

Prior to execution, the auction communication software 25 and/or theprioritization module 24 may be initially stored on an external storagemedium (not shown) (e.g., a compact disc (CD), a digital versatile disc(DVD), a magnetic cartridge tape, or any other suitable magnetic oroptical storage medium) or on an internal storage medium (e.g., thestorage unit 27 in FIG. 3).

The prioritization module (PM) 24 is configured to operate on a varietyof data inputs, three of which (32, 34, 36) are shown in FIG. 3. Eachdata block 32, 34, 36 may reside on a different computer system at theauction coordinator's site. The auction coordinator may transfer orreplicate (either manually or electronically) the data from differentcomputer systems to the host system 20 (e.g., in the storage unit 27 inthe host system 20) to allow the PM 24 to operate on the data accordingto the process steps illustrated in FIG. 4. Alternatively, the data inall three data blocks may not get stored in a distributed fashion, but,instead, may get stored on a single computer (e.g., in the storage unit27 in the host computer 20).

In one embodiment, the data inputs 32, 34, 36 are in a file format thatis accessible by Microsoft® Access software. For example, each of thedata inputs 32, 34, 36 may be a Microsoft® Access data file. The programcode for the prioritization module 24 may be created as a Microsoft®Access database file, which may be executable by the Microsoft® Accesssoftware and operate on the data inputs 32, 34, 36. In one embodiment,the host computer 20 may communicate with a backend server computer (notshown) in a client-server environment. The server computer may storevarious data (either generated during execution of the PM 24 or obtainedthrough other sources) necessary for successful operation of the PM 24.In that embodiment, the PM 24 may execute SQL queries to interact withthe server to exchange data between the server and the host system 20.All the computer displays generated by the PM 24 during run time (e.g.,the display screen shown in FIG. 5) may be displayed on the hostcomputer 20 using the Microsoft® Access software.

The data blocks 32, 34 and 36 represent auction-related data collectedor generated during prior auctions (i.e., auctions that have alreadyoccurred or are concluded prior in time to the commencement of thepresent auction requested by the buyer 10). The auction coordinator maysupply these prior-auction data to the PM 24, which operates on the datato generate a prioritized list of suppliers for the current auction(i.e., the auction to be commenced for the buyer 10). Each prior-auctiondata 32, 34, 36 may be stored in a searchable database residing on acomputer (e.g., the host computer 20). Each searchable database mayreside on a different computer, or on a single computer (networked orstand-alone) as discussed hereinbefore.

Thus, the PM 24 is employed prior to commencing an auction to generate alist of potential suppliers the auction coordinator may wish to inviteto participate in the auction to be carried out on behalf of the buyer10. Various auction-related information about suppliers, gathered duringprior auctions handled by the auction coordinator 20 for differentbuyers, may be objectively analyzed by the prioritization module 24 tominimize the amount of unnecessary calls to potential suppliers and alsoto increase the likelihood of a called supplier placing a competitivebid, thereby increasing the bidding yield of the supplier contactprocess performed prior to commencing an auction to expedite thecompetitive bidding.

The auction-related data from prior auctions may include pre-auctiondata and post auction data. The pre-auction data may include, forexample, the information about what goods or services a supplier iscapable of providing, and the names of suppliers that are permitted tobid. The post auction data may include, for example, the informationabout a supplier's bidding history, and the information concerning thestages of an auction a supplier has participated in.

Referring again to FIG. 3, the supplier capability profile data (“theprofile data”) 32 relates to the capabilities of a supplier to providethe buyer-requested goods or services. In one embodiment, for eachauction, a supplier may need to get registered with the auctioncoordinator to be able to participate in that auction. During thesupplier registration process, the supplier may be requested to fill outa Supplier Capability Profile form (either online or in a paper form)that collects information from the supplier against a number of datafields provided in the Profile form, thereby obtaining the profile data.Some exemplary data input fields in the Profile form include processcapabilities field (i.e., which industrial process or processes thesupplier is capable of performing), sales levels field (e.g., annual ormonthly sales or revenue), quality certification field (i.e., whetherthe supplier has QS (Quality Systems) or ISO (International Organizationfor Standardization) certification), and the supplier's geographiclocation field. The profile data provided by the supplier against thesecategories or fields may be stored in a searchable database in acomputer (e.g., the host computer 20).

The supplier contact event history data 34 (“the contact event data”)may be obtained by monitoring (either electronically or manually) thesupplier's participation during each prior auction for which thesupplier is registered to place bids. In other words, the contact eventdata may identify how far the supplier progressed in the biddingprocess. Each prior auction or competitive bidding event (CBE) mayinvolve a number of contact events including, for example, the candidateevent (where a supplier is considered to be a potential candidate orbidder for the auction), the contact event (where the supplier iscontacted by the auction coordinator or the auction sponsor and invitedto participate in the auction), the fact sheet event (where a suppliersubmits the profile data), the SQ-in event (what is this?), the “RFQsent” event (where an RFQ is sent to the supplier), the “supplieragreement in” event (where the supplier enters into a formal agreementwith the auction coordinator or auction sponsor and agrees toparticipate in the auction and to be bound by the terms of theagreement), the “trained” event (where the auction coordinator may trainone or more supplier personnel as to how to participate in the auctionand may educate them about rules and conditions governing the auction),and the “bid-in” event (where an actual bid is received from thesupplier, i.e., the supplier actively participates in the auction).

The supplier bidding history data 36 (“the bidding history”) istypically obtained by monitoring a supplier's bids during the bid-inevent for an actual auction. As noted hereinbefore, there may be morethan one lot on auction during a competitive bidding event, and each lotmay contain more than one product or item to be auctioned. However, asupplier may not necessarily bid for every lot on auction. Therefore,the supplier bidding history may focus on, for example: (1) the CBE's asupplier has participated in, (2) the lot(s) in each of those CBE's forwhich the supplier placed bids, and (3) what was the “rank” of thatsupplier for each lot the supplier bid on.

The “rank” of the bidders may generally be determined by comparing, inreal-time, the lowest amount bid by each bidder and ordering the biddersaccording to those lowest bids. The bidder who is ranked first is thebidder that has bid an amount lower than any other bidder in a reverseauction. The last rank may be a rank equal to the number of bidders whohave submitted bids in the auction. In the case of tie bids betweenbidders, the last rank may be a rank equal to the number of unique bidsby each bidder. In a reverse auction based on price only, the bidderhaving that last rank is the bidder that has submitted the highestamount.

Of course, there are many known ways to calculate the rank, and any ofthose may be used in connection with the subject invention, and areintended to be within the scope of the present invention. In a reverseauction, the bidders are generally ranked between first and lastaccording to the amounts of their lowest submitted bids at any giventime. Thus, a higher, or better ranked bidder (e.g., the bidder 14 inFIG. 1C) in a reverse auction is a bidder who has placed a comparativelylower bid, while a higher, or better ranked bidder in a forward auctionis a bidder who has placed a comparatively higher bid.

An auction may alternately be based on one or more factors other thanprice, such as quality, delivery factors (e.g., labor rate, lead time),and/or other factors (e.g., contract length) that are referred to hereincollectively as “total value.” Thus, rank may also be based on factorsother than price, including total value and any other factor that isuseful in an auction setting. A bid or bid amount is a value that issubmitted by each participating bidder (e.g., the bidders 12-16 in FIGS.1A-1B) for comparison to the bids of other bidders, and may likewise bebased on a variety of bid factors that are considered important to thebid participants. Those factors may include, for example, price,quality, other costs such as delivery costs, labor rate, project leadtime, contract length, or a total value. Bids may also be placed in anumber of ways including, for example, absolute total value, orcomparative value such as bidding in relation to an index price.

Referring now to FIG. 4, which shows various functions performed by theprioritization module 24 according to one embodiment of the presentinvention. As noted hereinbefore, the PM 24 generally operates on threetypes of input data: (1) the profile data 32, (2) the contact event data34, and (3) the bidding history data 36. The PM 24 module performs fourdiscrete processes utilizing appropriate data from the input data. Thefour discrete processes include: (1) identification of relevant supplybase 40, (2) analysis and scoring of supplier participation history 46,(3) analysis and scoring of supplier competitiveness history 52, and (4)combination of supplier participation score and competitiveness score58. As shown in FIG. 4, some of these processes include sub-processes asdiscussed hereinbelow.

In the identification of relevant supply base 40 (“the identificationprocess”), the PM 24 accesses the profile data 32 obtained duringsupplier registration process and generates a user interface 60 (FIG.5), which is displayed on the display 29 for the host computer 20. FIG.5 illustrates an exemplary user interface 60 generated and displayed bythe prioritization module 24 according to one embodiment of the presentinvention. As shown in FIG. 5, the user interface 60 displays a numberof data fields that an operator or user can select to identify thetarget supplier base—i.e., to generate the prioritized list of potentialbidders. FIG. 5 illustrates the user interface 60 to identify the targetsupplier base for a metal stamping process to be auctioned by theauction sponsor 10. The user or operator (not shown) at the auctioncoordinator's site may select (or deselect) appropriate data fields (asper buyer's requirements) to narrow or enlarge the choices of potentialsuppliers. For example, the user may restrict the number of selectionsto fifteen (15) as shown in FIG. 5. Further, the user may select one ormore sub-processes or related processes for metal stamping (e.g.,progressive metal stamping selected in FIG. 5) to focus on thosesuppliers that are capable of providing specialized services requestedby the buyer 10. The Boolean operators ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ and the ‘SelectAll’ option may be used to narrow or expand the search.

Additional fields in FIG. 5 are similar to those associated with thesupplier profile data 32 discussed earlier with reference to FIG. 3. Forexample, the user may also select appropriate values in such fields asthe ‘sales levels’ field, the ‘quality certification (QS-9000 or ISO)’fields, and the ‘supplier geographic location’ field shown in FIG. 5.The ‘Ratings’ field is discussed hereinbelow with reference to FIGS. 6and 7 and processes 46 and 52 in FIG. 4. The user may also selectvarious display options for the results of the search performed by thePM 24. For example, the user may select to display the list of selectedsuppliers in a spreadsheet form (where the suppliers are ranked, forexample, in a descending order), or the user may wish to clear thevalues selected in different fields and initiate a new search, or theuser may select to export the results of the search to a designateddatabase (e.g., a database in the storage 27 or in another computerconnected to the host computer 20).

FIG. 4 illustrates two sub-processes for the identification process 40.In the “identify relevant CBEs” sub-process 42, the PM 24 may identifyall CBEs that are relevant to the CBE at hand (here, the CBE for metalstampings). The information about each prior CBE carried out by theauction coordinator may be stored either part of the profile data 32 orindependently of the profile data 32. The CBE data may be stored in asearchable database form in, for example, the storage 27. When the userselects the ‘Display Events’ option (from the user interface 60 in FIG.5) to view a display of the list of relevant CBEs, the PM 24 searchesthe stored information about all CBEs conducted by the auctioncoordinator and identifies only those CBEs that auctioned at least oneitem similar to the item to be auctioned in the current CBE. Thus, inthe example illustrated in FIG. 5, the PM 24 selects those CBEs thatauctioned one or more items related to metal stampings. Such items mayinclude, for example, hard tool stampings, synergy metal stampings,sheet metal stamping and forming, small and medium metal stamping, largemetal stamping, etc. Thus, through the sub-process 42, the PM 24 mayfirst generate a list of prior bidding events or auctions havingauctioned one or more items similar to at least one item to be auctionedin the current auction requested by the buyer 10.

In the “identify suppliers” sub-process 44, the PM 24 searches theprofile data 32 (using, for example, the search restrictions input bythe user through the user interface 60) and extracts a list of all thosesuppliers who participated in the CBEs identified at block 42. For eachsupplier identified at block 44, the PM 24 may investigate whether thesupplier has the desired competitiveness score or the desiredparticipation score (as selected by the user through the user interface60). Based on the inquiry of supplier's scores, the PM 24 may generate afinal, prioritized list of potential bidders. The prioritized output maylist the qualified bidders in the descending order, i.e., the bidderhaving the highest score is listed first (or, given highest priority)followed by bidders with lower scores. Of course, the number of biddersin the list may be restricted by the user by entering desired numericallimit in the ‘Matches’ field in the interface 60.

In one embodiment, after conclusion of each auction, the PM 24 maycompute the participation score and/or the competitiveness score and/orthe combined score for each bidder who participated in that auction justconcluded. The PM 24 may store these computed scores along with theprofile data for each bidder. Alternatively, the PM 24 may store thescores in a separate, searchable database in, for example, the storage27. The database may include a list of all prior bidders and therelevant scores for each bidder against the bidder's name. Thegeneration or computation of the participation score and thecompetitiveness score for a bidder is described hereinbelow withreference to FIGS. 6 and 7. It is noted that the user interface 60allows a user to restrict or narrow the search of potential suppliers byspecifying desired scores for the participation score field and thecompetitiveness score field displayed on the interface 60. In theembodiment illustrated in FIG. 5, the user has chosen to view the namesof only those suppliers having the competitiveness score greater than orequal to fifty (50).

As indicated in FIG. 4, the process 46 analyzes and scores supplierparticipation history using the contact event data 34. In one embodimentof the present invention, the scoring process 46 assigns an objective,numerical score for each level of auction participation. FIG. 6illustrates an exemplary scoring scheme utilized by the prioritizationmodule 24 in one embodiment of the present invention to generate aparticipation score for a bidder. As shown by the table 62 in FIG. 6,each contact event in an auction may be assigned a numerical score basedon, for example, the importance of that contact event in the overallauction process and in successful conclusion of the auction. Forexample, the “contacted” event may receive a numerical score of “2,”whereas the “bid-in” event may receive a score of “10.” As can beunderstood by one skilled in the art, there may be many scoring schemesdifferent from that shown in table 62 that may be successfully utilizedto generate an objective participation score for a supplier.

The sub-process 48 examines the contact event data for each supplier inthe auction coordinator's database to extract information about thatsupplier's bidding participation. For each CBE the supplier isassociated with (or has participated in), the sub-process 48 identifieshow far that supplier progressed in the bidding process. Theparticipation score generation sub-process 50 then assigns the highestpossible score to the supplier for each CBE the supplier is associatedwith. In assigning the score, the sub-process 50 may consult thepre-defined score chart shown in table 62. In the embodiment shown inFIG. 6, the table 64 shows the participation score computed for asupplier (ABC Company) from the supplier's auction participationhistory. The supplier receives a score for the supplier's level ofparticipation in each CBE. For example, if the supplier is onlycontacted for a particular event and then drops out of the auctionprocess, then the supplier will receive only two points (as shown intable 62). As shown in table 64, the supplier (ABC Company) receives ascore of five (5) points for CBE #707 because the supplier dropped outof the auction process for CBE #707 after receiving an RFQ. On the otherhand, the supplier in FIG. 6 is shown to have received a score of ten(10) points for CBE #718 and CBE #694D because the supplier placed bidsin those CBEs. The score generation sub-process 50 then aggregatesindividual participation scores to generate the final participationscore for the supplier (ABC Company) as illustrated in table 64.

As shown in FIG. 4, the process 52 analyzes and scores suppliercompetitiveness history using the bidding history data 36 (FIG. 3). Inone embodiment of the present invention, the scoring process 52 assignsan objective, numerical score for a bidder's rank in an auction. FIG. 7illustrates an exemplary scoring scheme utilized by the prioritizationmodule 24 in one embodiment of the present invention to generate acompetitiveness score for a bidder. The scoring scheme shown in table 66in FIG. 7 is similar to that shown in table 62 in FIG. 6. As shown intable 66 in FIG. 7, each level of bidding performance may be assigned anumerical score based on, for example, the rank achieved by a bidder ina particular auction. The score assignments in table 66 are in adescending order—i.e., a bidder achieving the first rank gets themaximum points (here, ten points), followed by the bidder having thesecond rank, and so on as shown in FIG. 7. As can be understood by oneskilled in the art, there may be many scoring schemes different fromthat shown in table 66 that may be successfully utilized to generate anobjective competitiveness score for a supplier.

The sub-process 54 examines the bidding history data for each supplierin the auction coordinator's database to extract information about thatsupplier's bidding performance. The sub-process 54 identifies which CBEthe supplier is associated with and which lot(s) in that CBE thesupplier has bid on. The competitiveness score generation sub-process 56then assigns the score to the supplier in view of the supplier's rank inthe bidding for the corresponding lot. In assigning the score, thesub-process 56 may consult the pre-defined score chart shown in table66. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 7, the table 68 shows thecompetitiveness score computed for a supplier (XYZ Company) from thesupplier's bidding history. The supplier receives a score for thesupplier's rank in each lot the supplier has placed a bid for in thecorresponding CBE. For example, as shown in table 68, the supplier (XYZCompany) receives a score of five (5) points for lot #2 in CBE #694Abecause of the supplier's third rank, but receives a score of seven (7)points for lot #3 in the same CBE #694A because of the supplier's secondrank for that lot. The sub-process 56 then aggregates individual scoresto generate the final competitiveness score for the supplier (XYZCompany) as illustrated in table 68.

It is noted that the prioritization module 24 may be designed to computeeither the prioritization score or the competitiveness score, but notboth. Alternatively, the PM 24 may compute both of these scores for eachpotential supplier. In that event, the PM 24 may also be designed tocompute the combined score as discussed hereinbelow. It is evident thatthe score computation process may be ongoing in the sense that the PM 24may need to update the prioritization and the competitiveness scores foreach supplier or for each group of suppliers every time a new auctiontakes place because of the auction-related changes in the supplierparticipation data and bidding history information. In this manner, thePM 24 can maintain the most-recent participation and competitivenessscores for potential suppliers.

The participation and competitiveness scores for each supplier may bedisplayed on, for example, the display monitor 29 (FIG. 3) in manydifferent forms including, for example, in a histogram form, in aspreadsheet form for each category of scores (participation scorecategory and competitiveness score category) with suppliers listed in,for example, a descending order for each category of scores, or in agraph or chart form. FIG. 8 illustrates an exemplary scatter diagram 70depicting an X-Y plot of prioritization and competitiveness scores for anumber of suppliers. As shown in FIG. 8, the scatter diagram 70 mayassist an auction coordinator to assign (either manually orautomatically using the PM 24) different priority levels to thesuppliers whose data are plotted on the graph 70. FIG. 8 illustratesvarious priority levels created through rings drawn on the scatterdiagram 70. For example, the auction coordinator may assign the firstquartile rank (i.e., the highest priority level) to those suppliers whohave higher values for both their participation and competitivenessscores, the second quartile rank to suppliers immediately below (inparticipation and competitiveness score values) those in the firstquartile, and so on. The auction coordinator 20 may then initiatecontacting those suppliers in the first quartile and inviting them toparticipate in the current auction commenced by the sponsor 10. Manyother schemes to conveniently display the supplier scores and assignsupplier priorities may be conveniently devised.

Referring again to FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the PM 24 may also includea process 58 that combines the most recent participation score and themost recent competitiveness score for each supplier and generates acombined score for that supplier. The combined score may be stored alongwith the corresponding participation and competitiveness scores. In oneembodiment, the combined score is calculated using the followingformula:

${{Combined}\mspace{14mu}{Score}} = \sqrt{( {{Participation}\mspace{14mu}{Score}} )^{2} + ( {{Competitiveness}\mspace{14mu}{Score}} )^{2}}$In one embodiment, the PM 24 may be configured to determine supplierpriorities based on the combined score values for the suppliers. Forexample, the PM 24 may prioritize the supplier pool starting with thesupplier having the highest combined score and then choosing each nextsupplier in a descending order. Alternatively, the PM 24 may display ahistogram with supplier names on the X-axis and the combined scorevalues on the Y-axis. Other alternative displays similar to thosediscussed hereinabove with reference to the priority and competitivenessscores may also be generated for the convenience of the user making thedecision as to supplier prioritization.

The foregoing describes a method and system for selecting potentialbidders or suppliers for a current electronic auction by usingquantitative models to create a prioritized list of potential suppliers.A prioritization software analyzes a supplier's bidding participationhistory and bidding competitiveness history from the bidding datacollected for all prior auctions in which the supplier participated orwas requested by the auction coordinator to participate. Using the priorbid data, the software generates a participation score and acompetitiveness score for the supplier. The participation andcompetitiveness scores may be combined to generate a combined score. Allpotential suppliers may be prioritized based on any of these scoresindividually or a combination of two or more of these scores. Theprioritized list may contain the names of suppliers in a descendingorder so that the auction coordinator may select which of the listedsuppliers be requested to participate in the current auction.

The supplier prioritization software according to the present inventiondramatically reduces the number of suppliers required at the beginningof a competitive bidding event or auction. Thus, the prioritizationsoftware assists in reducing the transaction cost involved in supplierselection by generating, using objective data, a prioritized list ofpotential suppliers that may be invited to participate in the auction.The prioritization list generated using quantitative values (instead ofsubjective values) further minimizes the amount of unnecessary calls topotential suppliers and maximizes the likelihood that a called supplierwill place a competitive bid, thereby increasing the bidding yield persupplier selected.

While the invention has been described in detail and with reference tospecific embodiments thereof, it will be apparent to one skilled in theart that various changes and modifications can be made therein withoutdeparting from the spirit and scope thereof. In particular, it should benoted that while the auction functions described above have beendescribed in the context of downward pricing auctions, the auctionfunctions can be equally applied to upward pricing auctions. Thus, it isintended that the present invention cover the modifications andvariations of this invention provided they come within the scope of theappended claims and their equivalents.

1. A system for selecting a group of bidders for a current bidding eventto auction a lot having one or more items, comprising: a processorconfigured to: identify a prior bidding event having occurred beforesaid current bidding event, wherein said prior bidding event includes aplurality of contact events for each bidder participating in said priorbidding event; identify one or more participating bidders for said priorbidding event; quantify participation of each identified bidder in eachof said plurality of contact events for said prior bidding event,thereby generating a corresponding participation score for each saididentified bidder; prioritize the identified bidders in a firstdescending order based on said corresponding participation score,thereby generating a first prioritized list of bidders; select saidgroup of bidders for said current bidding event from said firstprioritized list of bidders; identify each bid-in event for said priorbidding event, wherein each said bid-in event is one of said pluralityof contact events and relates to bids received from one or moreidentified bidders during said prior bidding event; obtain acorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent in which said identified bidder has participated; quantify eachcorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent in which said identified bidder has participated, therebygenerating a corresponding competitiveness score for each saididentified bidder; prioritize the identified bidders in a seconddescending order based on said corresponding competitiveness score,thereby generating a second prioritized list of bidders; and select saidgroup of bidders for said current bidding event from at least one ofsaid first prioritized list of bidders and said second prioritized listof bidders; and a memory coupled to the processor and configured toprovide the processor with instructions.
 2. The system of claim 1,wherein selecting said group of bidders from at least one of said firstand said second prioritized lists of bidders includes one of thefollowing: selecting a predetermined number of top bidders from at leastone of said first and said second prioritized lists of bidders as saidgroup of bidders for said current bidding event; and selecting auser-specified number of top bidders from at least one of said first andsaid second prioritized lists of bidders as said group of bidders forsaid current bidding event.
 3. The system of claim 1, whereinidentifying each said bid-in event includes identifying each said bid-inevent for each lot that was placed on auction during said prior biddingevent, wherein obtaining said corresponding rank includes obtaining saidcorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent for each said lot identified for said prior bidding event, andwherein quantifying each said corresponding rank includes quantifyingeach said corresponding rank for each said identified bidder for eachsaid bid-in event for each said lot identified for said prior biddingevent.
 4. The system of claim 1 wherein the processor is furtherconfigured to: generate a corresponding combined score for each saididentified bidder using said corresponding participation score andcompetitiveness score; prioritize the identified bidders in a thirddescending order based on said corresponding combined score, therebygenerating a third prioritized list of bidders; and select said group ofbidders for said current bidding event from said third prioritized listof bidders.
 5. The system of claim 4, wherein each said combined scoreis generated using the following formula:${{combined}\mspace{14mu}{score}} = {\sqrt{({participationscore})^{2} + ({competitivenesscore})^{2}}.}$6. A system for selecting a group of bidders for a current bidding eventto auction a lot having one or more items, comprising: a processorconfigured to: search a first database containing an information aboutone or more bidding events having occurred before said current biddingevent to identify a prior bidding event therefrom, wherein said priorbidding event includes a plurality of contact events for each bidderparticipating in said prior bidding event; search a second databaseusing said information about said identified prior bidding event toidentify one or more participating bidders for said prior bidding event,wherein said second electronic database contains identity informationfor all bidders corresponding to said one or more bidding events fromsaid first database; quantify participation of each identified bidder ineach of said plurality of contact events for said prior bidding event,thereby generating a corresponding participation score for each saididentified bidder; prioritize the identified bidders in a firstdescending order based on said corresponding participation score,thereby generating a first prioritized list of bidders; select saidgroup of bidders for said current bidding event from said firstprioritized list of bidders; identify each bid-in event for said priorbidding event, wherein each said bid-in event is one of said pluralityof contact events and relates to bids received from one or moreidentified bidders during said prior bidding event; obtain acorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent in which said identified bidder has participated; quantify eachcorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent in which said identified bidder has participated, therebygenerating a corresponding competitiveness score for each saididentified bidder; prioritize the identified bidders in a seconddescending order based on said corresponding competitiveness score,thereby generating a second prioritized list of bidders; and select saidgroup of bidders for said current bidding event from at least one ofsaid first prioritized list of bidders and said second prioritized listof bidders.
 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the processor is furtherconfigured to: generate a corresponding combined score for each saididentified bidder using said corresponding participation score andcompetitiveness score; prioritize the identified bidders in a thirddescending order based on said corresponding combined score, therebygenerating a third prioritized list of bidders; and select said group ofbidders for said current bidding event from said third prioritized listof bidders.
 8. The system of claim 6, wherein the processor is furtherconfigured to cause the display of at least one of the following: atleast one list of bidders from said first prioritized list of bidders,and said second prioritized list of bidders; said group of biddersselected from at least one of said first prioritized list of bidders,and said second prioritized list of bidders; and at least one of saidcorresponding participation score, and said correspondingcompetitiveness score for each said identified bidder.
 9. A system forselecting a group of bidders for a current bidding event to auction alot having one or more items, comprising: a processor configured to:identify a prior bidding event having occurred before said currentbidding event, wherein said prior bidding event includes a plurality ofcontact events for each bidder participating in said prior biddingevent; identify one or more participating bidders for said prior biddingevent; identify each bid-in event for said prior bidding event, whereineach said bid-in event is one of said plurality of contact events andrelates to bids received from one or more identified bidders during saidprior bidding event; obtain a corresponding rank for each saididentified bidder for each said bid-in event in which said identifiedbidder has participated; quantify each corresponding rank for each saididentified bidder for each said bid-in event in which said identifiedbidder has participated, thereby generating a correspondingcompetitiveness score for each said identified bidder; prioritize theidentified bidders in a descending order based on said correspondingcompetitiveness score, thereby generating a prioritized list of bidders;and select said group of bidders for said current bidding event fromsaid prioritized list of bidders.
 10. The system of claim 9, whereinidentifying said prior bidding event includes searching a first databasecontaining an information about one or more bidding events havingoccurred before said current bidding event, and wherein identifying saidone or more participating bidders includes searching a second databaseusing said information about said identified prior bidding event,wherein said second database contains identity information for ailbidders corresponding to said one or more bidding events from said firstelectronic database.
 11. The system of claim 9, wherein selecting saidgroup of bidders from said prioritized list of bidders includes one ofthe following: selecting a predetermined number of top bidders from saidprioritized list of bidders as said group of bidders for said currentbidding event; and selecting a user-specified number of top bidders fromsaid prioritized list of bidders as said group of bidders for saidcurrent bidding event.
 12. The system of claim 9, wherein identifyingeach said bid-in event includes identifying each said bid-in event foreach lot that was placed on auction during said prior bidding event,wherein obtaining said corresponding rank includes obtaining saidcorresponding rank for each said identified bidder for each said bid-inevent for each said lot identified for said prior bidding event, andwherein quantifying each said corresponding rank includes quantifyingeach said corresponding rank for each said identified bidder for eachsaid bid-in event for each said lot identified for said prior biddingevent.
 13. The system of claim 9, wherein the processor is furtherconfigured to: allow a user to specify a set of one or more criteria;search a database using said set of criteria to select said group ofbidders for said current bidding event, wherein said database includesinformation about a plurality of bidders arranged according to said setof criteria, and wherein said plurality of bidders includes said groupof bidders for said current bidding event; and present to said user atleast the name of each bidder in said group of bidders for said currentbidding event obtained by searching said database.
 14. The system ofclaim 13, wherein said information about said plurality of biddersincludes at least one of the following: the name of each of saidplurality of bidders; a first information about process capabilities ofeach of said plurality of bidders; a second information about salesrevenue of each of said plurality of bidders; a third information aboutquality certification status of each of said plurality of bidders; afourth information about geographic location of each of said pluralityof bidders; and said corresponding competitiveness score for each ofsaid plurality of bidders.
 15. The system of claim 9, wherein theprocessor is further configured to cause the display of at least one ofthe following: said prioritized list of bidders; said group of biddersselected from said prioritized list of bidders; and said correspondingcompetitiveness score for each said identified bidder.